Just a reminder of the background: Patersons submitted their planning application in December 2014. Your Community Council together with Save Gillies Hill then submitted a very detailed objection in March 2015. However it was clear to us, and they admitted this themselves, that Stirling Council planners didn’t have the expertise in-house to properly appraise our objection.
To cut a long story short, it seemed to us that when Stirling Council appointed an independent consultant Ironside Farrar Ltd (IFL) in July 2015 to carry out an assessment of Patersons’ ‘Environmental Statement’ that our concerns were allayed. How wrong we were! But more on that later. IFL duly produced a report in July which contained major criticisms of Patersons planning application, and Patersons were asked to go and think again on some important issues. One of these issues - which both the CCC/SGH objection and IFL had identified - was the need to carry out a ‘cumulative impact assessment’. Basically this means that Patersons cannot look at Murrayshall in isolation but had to consider the impact of both them and the adjacent quarry company at Murrayshall - Tillicoultry Quarries - working simultaneously.
That brought us pretty well up to date, with Patersons submitting supplementary documents at the end of November 2015. These documents Volume 4 - Supplementary Information and Volume 5-Cumulative Impact Assessment are available for inspection in the local library and at Stirling Council’s planning office. We have major criticisms of these new documents. They don’t address the ‘principle of the development’ ie they arrogantly refuse to justify that the community of Stirling and surroundings needs the rock from Murrayshall. This is something they are obliged to do, and we showed in our March 2015 objection that there was more than enough rock available in the area to meet all the Stirling ‘market area’ needs.
In addition, they use very questionable assumptions for their ‘cumulative impact assessment’. One assumption is agreed however, and that is that if both quarry companies are allowed to work simultaneously, which will happen unless we can stop this planning application..... then instead of 132 (32 Tonne) lorries per day running along Polmaise Road and through Kings Park there will be 264 (32 Tonne) lorries per day. Think of the safety issues with school children if nothing else!
It was also obvious from Patersons’ new submission that they had paid little, if any, regard to the detailed information on the environment that we had provided in our March 2015 objection. However we think that this is more a fault of Stirling Council’s planners than Patersons. Some of these issues would take a whole newsletter to give them justice, and there have been meetings of both the Community Council and Save Gillies Hill when these issues were gone into in more detail.
In the meantime your CCC/SGH ‘working group’ is busy putting together detailed comments and possibly further objections to Patersons application.
Those of you who put in letters of objection last year don’t need to resubmit. They’re still valid, but obviously if, after you’ve read Patersons’ new attempts to justify the reactivation of Murrayshall Quarry, you want to submit a new objection then feel free to do so.
If You Want Further Information...
3rd February: SGH coffee morning at Church Hall 10-12
20th February: CCDT/SGH family walk with Robert Trevis- Smith around the CCDT lease area on Gillies Hill.
23rd April: SGH coffee morning at Church Hall 10-12